Tag: Government

Coming up on Talking Auckland

·

Next batch of Special Housing Areas

and

More on the Len Brown Saga

 

Coming up over the next few days on Talking Auckland:

 

Special Housing Areas

There is a briefing on the Housing Accord and next batch of Special Housing Areas at Auckland Council later this morning. Transport Blog have released a post showing the maps of the next SHA’s base on an Order in Council from Government last week. A further post from Talking Auckland on the Housing Accord and SHA’s will be posted up in tomorrow morning.

 

The Len Brown Saga

This mess keeps trucking along and will spill over into the New Year – sadly. While the original affair was never going to prompt attention from Talking Auckland, failing to declare gifts and so will. As a result Talking Auckland owing to large public interest in the Len Brown Saga (as this now affects decision-making amongst the Council and the Committees) will be keeping a watching eye and run commentary as needed.

Some interesting commentary from Morning Report can be heard here including a rare comment from the Deputy Mayor:

Councillors to quiz Brown about report

My media statement in the Len Brown Saga can be seen here:  Media Statement on the Len Brown Saga

 

Other Stuff

As we head into the Christmas-New Year break Talking Auckland will be switching into holiday mode until around Wellington Anniversary Weekend in mid-January. The Summer Series will fill in on the interim with lots of photos from around Auckland in its Summer glory (including violent thunderstorms).

If anything of significance comes up in the Holiday period Talking Auckland will run commentary on it

 

But for now I better head to the City for the Housing Accord Briefing…

 

 

De-Ja-Vu with Auckland(‘s) Transport – Again

·

Where did I put that old Record Player – Seriously

 

I caught this article in the NZ Herald yesterday on my so-called favourite second topic: Auckland Transport. Actually two articles caught my attention and I seriously wonder if I am having a case of De-ja-vu here in regards to Auckland‘s Transport.

The two articles of notice were these ones, both from Mathew Dearnaley:

 

Starting with “Public transport decline threat to future funding,” this is what had to be said:

From the NZ Herald

Public transport decline threat to future funding

Auckland’s public transport patronage continues to languish.

Trip numbers over the past 12 months ended 3.3 per cent lower than for the previous year.

Patronage to August 31 amounted to 69.2 million passenger trips, down from the previous annual figure of 71.5 million, according to a report to Auckland Transport’s board yesterday.

Trains accounted for the largest proportional loss, down 7.5 per cent to 10.1 million trips, despite the added contribution of the new Manukau line.

 

Even so, rail is starting to show a slight recovery, after its annual patronage drop from almost 11 million trips.

It notched up just over a million trips last month, 1.7 per cent higher than in August last year, despite one fewer business day.

But much more is needed, making a promised new fares strategy all the more pressing.

 

The Government requires Auckland Transport to have almost doubled its annual patronage to 20 million trips by 2020 before it will accelerate its 50 per cent funding for the city’s $2.86 billion underground rail project.

One encouraging statistic is an improvement in punctuality. Close to 89 per cent of trains arrived at their final destinations in August within five minutes of scheduled times, up from a 12-month average of 86.2 per cent.

…

Just a quick note; going back over the Prime Minister’s speech in regards to that 20 million figure it was also stated that if AT could show around 8% growth in rail patronage year in year out then the Government would look at starting the CRL around 2018.

 

To the main matter though what is seriously going on and why does this issue keep popping up.

Regular and historic readers of Talking Auckland would have read here at the blog of the ups and downs we have had with Auckland Transport. At the same time there has been copious amounts of (and not solely from the blog either): public flaying, constructive criticism, submissions, feedback, presentations to committees, lobbying and even meetings to try to offer what assistance once can give to help get our public transport systems (especially rail) back on track.

The results? Two fold:

  1. Success with Auckland Transport’s Strategy and Planning arm in regards to South Auckland‘s public transport system. Whether that be our proposed bus routes, the slow but steady progress with Glenora Road Station, or preparations for the Manukau South Link progress is being made there. This particular arm I quite enjoy talking to or working with that particular department when the time arises.
  2. The Operations arm of AT? Failure and get regularly ignored unless I do something like force a fare back down like I did last September. And it is the operations side causing the most anguish in Auckland for both public transport users and the wider ratepayers

 

Still from the NZ Herald piece:

Trains accounted for the largest proportional loss, down 7.5 per cent to 10.1 million trips, despite the added contribution of the new Manukau line.

Even so, rail is starting to show a slight recovery, after its annual patronage drop from almost 11 million trips.

…

Even there the recovery is at risk of stalling again. 

So what to do folks because I am now seriously lost after nearly two years of trying. Anything that would get patronage realistically back up gets shunned while anything that would be a detriment to patronage happens (otherwise patronage would not have slipped as far as it has).

 

The City Rail Link

 

$3.3b by the time the project gets started and there is a risk of a further blow out – owing to history some of our civic projects. This was noted in the Herald article “Rail delays threaten big blowout.”

I am sure I have said the Rail Fallacy would occur with the City Rail Link using comparisons from other projects overseas – and I could still end up being correct despite earlier ridicule on the matter. The Rail Fallacy Commentary previously mentioned on Talking Auckland can be found here: https://voakl.net/tag/rail-fallacy/

 

Do I want the Rail Fallacy to occur with the City Rail Link though? HECK NO! But pragmatism and harsh reality I must also bear in mind – kind of like risk management. The Rail Fallacy acknowledgement in part was me running a crude risk management exercise across multiple levels on the CRL. At least this way I knew/know the risks and can adapt for it accordingly where required.

Put it this way, at least if (political) reality bites and The Rail Fallacy does happen I was certainly most prepared – unlike others. I would also say this was good business sense in play too. 

 

In the end though unless Auckland Transport pulls finger I am going to struggle to see how the CRL will not start until 2020. Oh and for those like ATB who might put their faith in the EMU’s. Having flash new trains will provide some kick but not the silver bullet needed to bring the CRL forward to 2018. No amount of new rolling stock will counter: getting stuck behind the increasing amount of freight trains with out the third line fully complete, fare products not lined up properly and missing simple links such as the Manukau Rail South Link to attract more actual patronage. So again AT needs to pull finger and get the right things done – no excuses.

 

Final remark

Trains accounted for the largest proportional loss, down 7.5 per cent to 10.1 million trips, despite the added contribution of the new Manukau line.

Hmmm – waiting for that South Link that will feed real numbers in the Manukau Line and station… Lets try and not keep the wards of Manurewa/Papakura and Franklin waiting much longer please AT. There is a pent up demand waiting for a direct service from Pukekohe/Papakura to Manukau via the South Link and some modelling I ran estimates that 20 minute, 7 day a week services using that link would mean patronage levels rivalling our Ellersile and Glen Innes Stations. So lets try and get this built in the upcoming Christmas Block of Lines – okay – please.

 

Related articles

Pre-Election Reports from the Council

·

The State of Council before the Elections

 

Auckland Council as per the Local Government Act has released its very first Pre-Election report for your consumption.

From Council

First pre-election report released
 

Auckland Council has today issued its very first pre-election report.

A new requirement of all councils under the Local Government Act from this year, the pre-election report is prepared by the local authority’s chief executive and must be politically independent.

“The purpose of a pre-election report under the Act is for councils to provide information to promote public discussion about the issues a council faces ahead of the local body elections, so voters can make more informed choices,” says Doug McKay, Auckland Council Chief Executive.

The Auckland Council Pre-Election Report 2013, prepared to meet the requirements of the Act, includes financial results for the three financial years immediately preceding the date of the election and latest projections for the three years immediately after.

The report includes a forecasted result for 2012/2013 year; given the final audited financial results for this period will not be reported to council until September 2013.

The report is prepared on a group basis, including council-controlled organisations, and covers operating expenditure, major projects and capital expenditure, debt projections and rates projections for 2014-2017.

—-ends—-

 

You can read the Report HERE (opens in new tab)

 

Election coverage will continue here on Talking Auckland as it happens.

 

Happens When you Pigeon Hole a Debate

·

Why the CBG Failed at a cost of $1.5m of your money

 

[Note: CBG figure moved from $1.1m to $1.5m]

I already posted today on my consensus of No Confidence against the Consensus Building Group’s Final report based on a failed Integrated Transport Program. You can see that commentary here: No Consensus in Funding the Integrated Transport Program

In that commentary I did mention how the Mayor through the Auckland Plan and his brief to the CBG pigeon holed the debate into looking at basically one option: TAX! Whether that be an increase in rates (which is a property tax), petrol tax or road pricing (crude congestion charging). Left out were asset sell downs, a lottery, departure and bed taxes, and a regional sales tax.

Problem? The Government as widely expected blasted down what the Consensus Building Group “came to” with the opposition effectively doing the same although for different reasons (Julie Ann Genter’s piece for example).

In saying that the Government rather than looking at a regional fuel tax as part of suite of options, it has decided on a nation-wide petrol tax increase as a sole option which besides many other things will rightfully annoy the rest of the country!

 

By the looks of things as well the Government could “hint” at Council moving on its existing asset base to help pay for some the transport projects. But, again we have a problem. We have no idea on how the city truly feels towards the asset question nor the to lotteries (and other options) because the Mayor denied our democratic right to have an effective say via a submission – if the CBG were allowed to look at such a scope.

The Mayor’s ideology is to me irrelevant and can be kept at home. What I want is vision dosed with pragmatism and all options on the table for OUR consideration free of the mayor’s ideology.

One thing would have been for certain; if via the submissions to the CBG we overwhelmingly rejected the assets question then it could have been further ammo against Brownlee. However, we will never know that answer thanks again to the piegon holing by the Mayor.

And so we are stuck with really no options at all to the point it is the Worst of All worlds. Effective taxed out of existence…

Vancouver looks mighty fine at the moment…

Note: Answering a question from another article; The Consensus Building Group was stacked with effective lobbyists rather than professional consultants, civil engineers and Geographers (who look at the Physical and Human environments and consequences of our actions)

 

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and in support of a #movingauckland

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL

Related articles